Two sites are currently under consideration for a bridge over a small river. The north site requires a suspension bridge. The south site has a much shorter span, allowing for a truss bridge, but it would require new road construction.The suspension bridge will cost $500 million with annual inspection andmaintenance costs of $350,000. In addition, the concrete deck would have to be resurfaced every 10 years at a cost of $1,000,000. The truss bridge and approach roads are expected to cost $250 million and have annual maintenance costs of $200,000. This bridge would have to be painted every 3 years at a cost of $400,000. In addition, the bridge would have to be sandblasted every 10 years at a cost of $1,900,000. The cost of purchasing right-of-way is expected to be $20 million for the suspension bridge and $150 million for the truss bridge. Compare the alternatives on the basis of their capitalized cost if the interest rate is 6% per year.

The city of Columbia is considering extending the runways of its municipal airport so that commercial jets can use the facility. The land necessary for the runway extension is currently a farmland that can be purchased for $350,000. Construction costs for the runway extension are projected to be $600,000, and the additional annual maintenance costs for the extension are estimated to be $22,500. If the runways are extended, a small terminal will be constructed at a cost of $250,000. The annual operating and maintenance costs for the terminal are estimated at $75,000. Finally, the projected increase in flights will require the addition of two air traffic controllers at an annual cost of $100,000. Annual bemefits of the runway extension have been estimated as follows: Rental receipts from airlines leasing space at the facility $325,000 $65,000 Airport tax charged to passengers $50,000 $50,000 Convenience benefit for residents of Columbia Additional tourism dollars for Columbia Apply the…

The city of Columbia is considering extending the runways of its municipal airport so that commercial jets can use the facility. The land necessary for the runway extension is currently a farmland that can be purchased for $350,000. Construction costs for the runway extension are projected to be $600,000, and the additional annual maintenance costs for the extension are estimated to be $22,500. If the runways are extended, a small terminal will be constructed at a cost of $250,000. The annual operating and maintenance costs for the terminal are estimated at $75,000. Finally, the projected increase in flights will require the addition of two air traffic controllers at an annual cost of $100,000. Annual benefits of the runway extension have been estimated as follows (shown): Apply the B–C ratio method with a study period of 20 years and a MARR of 10% per year to determine whether the runways at Columbia Municipal Airport should be extended.

The Arkansas Department of Transportation may build a new highway between Texarkana and Fort Smith, currently a distance of 181 miles. Design 1 is a four-lane highway built entirely on the existing route. Design 2 includes a significant rerouting through a mountainous region that would reduce the mileage to 166 miles. Design 3 is a fully access-controlled interstate-quality highway with more rerouting, which would reduce the total mileage to 148 miles.Benefits for this project depend on mileage saved times the number of vehicles, plus the estimated value for the larger number of trips that will occur with the shorter and faster routes. The estimated benefits and costs of the three potential designs are shown in the table. Doing nothing yields no costs and no benefits. Using incremental analysis for the B/C ratio, a planning horizon of 75 years, and a MARR of 6%, which design would you recommend?

An electric utility is considering a new power plant in northern Arizona. Power from the plant would be sold in the Phoenix area, where it is badly needed. Because the firm has received a permit, the plant would be legal, but it would cause some air pollution. The company could spend an additional $40 million at Year 0 to mitigate the environmental problem, but it would not be required to do so. The plant without mitigation would cost $240 million, and the expected cash inflows would be $80 million per year for 5 years. If the firm does invest in mitigation, the annual inflows would be $84 million. Unemployment in the area where the plant would be built is high, and the plant would provide about 350 good jobs. The risk-adjusted WACC is 17%.  a. Calculate the NPV and IRR with and without mitigation. b. How should the environmental effects be dealt with when evaluating this project? c. Should this project be undertaken? If so, should the firm do the mitigation? Why or why not?

An electric utility is considering a new power plant in northern Arizona. Power from the plant would be sold in the Phoenix area, where it is badly needed. Because the firm has received a permit, the plant would be legal; but it would cause some air pollution. The company could spend an additional $40 million at Year 0 to mitigate the environmental problem, but it would not be required to do so. The plant without mitigation would require an initial outlay of $240.20 million, and the expected cash inflows would be $80 million per year for 5 years. If the firm does Invest in mitigation, the annual inflows would be $84.06 million. Unemployment in the area where the plant would be built is high, and the plant would provide about 350 good jobs. The risk adjusted WACC is 19%. a. Calculate the NPV and IRR with mitigation. Enter your answer for NPV in millions. For example, an answer of $10,550,000 should be entered as 10.55. Negative values, if any, should be indicated by a minus sign. Do not…

An electric utility is considering a new power plant in northern Arizona. Power from the plant would be sold in the Phoenix area, where it is badly needed. Because the firm has received a permit, the plant would be legal; but it would cause some air pollution. The company could spend an additional $40 million at Year 0 to mitigate the environmental problem, but it would not be required to do so. The plant without mitigation would require an initial outlay of $240.20 million, and the expected cash Inflows would be $80 million per year for 5 years. If the firm does invest in mitigation, the annual inflows would be $84.06 million. Unemployment in the area where the plant would be built is high, and the plant would provide about 350 good jobs. The risk adjusted WACC is 19%. a. Calculate the NPV and IRR with mitigation. Enter your answer for NPV in millions. For example, an answer of $10,550,000 should be entered as 10.55. Negative values, if any, should be indicated by a minus sign. Do not…

An electric utility is considering a new power plant in northern Arizona. Power from the plant would be sold in the Phoenix area, where it is badly needed. Because the firm has received a permit, the plant would be legal; but it would cause some air pollution. The company could spend an additional $40 million at Year 0 to mitigate the environmental problem, but it would not be required to do so. The plant without mitigation would require an initial outlay of $209.71 million, and the expected cash Inflows would be $70 million per year for 5 years. If the firm does Invest in mitigation, the annual inflows would be $75.66 million. Unemployment in the area where the plant would be built is high, and the plant would provide about 350 good jobs. The risk adjusted WACC is 18%. a. Calculate the NPV and IRR with mitigation. Enter your answer for NPV in millions. For example, an answer of $10,550,000 should be entered as 10.55. Negative values, if any, should be indicated by a minus sign. Do not…

An electric utility is considering a new power plant in northern Arizona. Power from the plant would be sold in the Phoenix area, where it is badly needed. Because the firm has received a permit, the plant would be legal; but it would cause some air pollution. The company could spend an additional $40 million at Year 0 to mitigate the environmental problem, but it would not be required to do so. The plant without mitigation would require an initial outlay of $209.80 million, and the expected cash inflows would be $70 million p year for 5 years. If the firm does invest in mitigation, the annual inflows would be $75.55 million. Unemployment in the area where the plant would be built is high, and the plant would provide about 350 good jobs. The risk adjusted WACC is 17%. a. Calculate the NPV and IRR with mitigation. Enter your answer for NPV in millions. For example, an answer of $10,550,000 should be entered as 10.55. Negative values, in any, should be indicated by a minus sign. Do not…

An electric utility is considering a new power plant in northern Arizona. Power from the plant would be sold in the Phoenix area, where it is badly needed. Because the firm has received a permit, the plant would be legal; but it would cause some alr pollution. The company could spend an additional $40 million at Year 0 to mitigate the environmental problem, but it would not be required to do so. The plant without mitigation would require an initial outlay of $210.55 million, and the expected cash Inflows would be $70 million per year for 5 years. If the firm does Invest in mitigation, the annual inflows would be $75.20 million. Unemployment in the area where the plant would be built is high, and the plant would provide about 350 good jobs. The risk adjusted WACC is 19%. a. Calculate the NPV and IRR with mitigation. Enter your answer for NPV in millions. For example, an answer of $10,550,000 should be entered as 10.55. Negative values, if any, should be indicated by a minus sign. Do not…